Skip to content
GitLab
View open merge request
  1. 06 Oct, 2020 5 commits
  3. 05 Oct, 2020 9 commits
  5. 25 Sep, 2020 2 commits
  7. 21 Sep, 2020 2 commits
  9. 18 Sep, 2020 1 commit
  11. 17 Sep, 2020 2 commits
  13. 14 Sep, 2020 1 commit
  15. 10 Sep, 2020 2 commits
  17. 08 Sep, 2020 1 commit
  19. 31 Aug, 2020 1 commit
  21. 27 Aug, 2020 2 commits
  23. 25 Aug, 2020 1 commit
  25. 21 Aug, 2020 2 commits
  27. 20 Aug, 2020 1 commit
  29. 14 Aug, 2020 3 commits
  31. 13 Aug, 2020 2 commits
    • Grace's avatar
      Name change. (#1694) · 2ea1ada6
      Grace authored
      2ea1ada6
    • Rodrigo Walter Ehresmann's avatar
      Change the way polymorphic fields display links (#1737) · 86cfaa8e
      Rodrigo Walter Ehresmann authored 
      (Originally by @rwehresmann. Unfortunately GitHub removes commit attribution
when doing squash+merge of a single commit.)

There is a problem in the way we're calling `valid_action?` in the polymorphic field.

Contextualizing: The `valid_action?` implementation receives as second argument the resource class name (constantize), and so will look for the correspondent controller and check if the action exists. In the polymorphic field, we're using this to display the attribute as a link or just plain text.

The problem: In the `_show` partial we check for the field attribute, that will return just the attribute name, and polymorphic fields constantly have attribute names that don't correspond whit any controller name. Here is an example: I can have an Address model that have a polymorphic association that receives the name of `owner`, and the owner can be a Shop and User model. We have the `ShopsController` and `UsersController`, but not an `OwnersController`. As result, we'll be showing the owner as plain text only.

The solution: Just inform the field data class instead of the attribute name. Doing so, using the example described above, we'll be checking for the ShopsController and UsersController instead of the OwnersController, properly showing the owner as a link.
      86cfaa8e
  33. 12 Aug, 2020 1 commit
  35. 03 Aug, 2020 1 commit
  37. 31 Jul, 2020 1 commit
    • Pablo Brasero's avatar
      Fix pagination of "Page" models (#1725) · dd72fb28
      Pablo Brasero authored 
      Using the param :page for top-level pagination (ie: index pages as opposed to
has_many lists in show pages) conflicts with paginating resources whose type
happens to be "Page".

Instead of a unit test, a feature spec is used as the pagination code is all over
the place making this quite tricky. Ideally, we should move all the pagination
code into a single module that can be tested in isolation. This in turn is not
easy, as Kaminari doesn't make it easy.

A new feature spec called pagination_spec.rb, bringing over other pre-existing
pagination examples, to help organise things, and also to take advantage of
the helper method expect_to_appear_in_order in the new example.

Fixes #1709
      dd72fb28